We need goals from somewhere. It's still not clear whether any of the guys on our current roster will produce. That said, I don't know if Lecavalier would fix that problem or just add to it (and with a higher price tag to boot). He hasn't hit 30 goals in the last 5 seasons.

Also concerning is his career -117 rating (and minuses in each of the last 6 seasons). Defensive liability? Doesn't seem like a good fit for a Hitch system.

Bernie is spot on. Commenter Raymond Bay is also spot on. A gigantic poster of the Hawks parading around with the Cup hanging in the locker room should provide ample motivation to not pussy shit around, and if it doesn't then everyone who plays like a primadona dancing queen needs to pack up and get the frank out.

I would doubt that the Blues make a big splash in the free agent market. My guess is, beyond resigning their key RFAs, their moves are likely to be budget neutral. They did afterall add $6.6 M to next season's payroll at the deadline and raises to Shattenkirk, Berglund, Stewart and Piet will more than offset the savings from AMac. (They "remain interested" in resigning Leopold for what thats worth, probably just saying the 'right things')

That said, of the current list of UFA options.

The Blues "have been linked to" Daniel Briere. His numbers have declined the most recently. Like the rest, he is 33. He put up just 16 points in 34 games this past season with a minus 13 and just 65 in 104 games over the past 2 seasons. 2010-1 was his last decent year 34-34-68 in 77 games.

Brad Richards(also 33) had 34 points in 46 games and a total of 100 in 128 games over 2 seasons. He had 28-49-77 in 72 games in 2010-1.

Vincent Lecavalier (33 I'm sensing a trend) if he gets bought out. Stable numbers, if now more second line center than first. 32 points in 39 games last season, 49 in 64, 54 in 65 the previous 2.

Mike Ribiero (anyone? anyone? Beuhler?) coming off his best year in 5 seasons 49 points in 48 games. 183 points in 204 games over last 3 seasons combined.

Assuming we surprise and sign a big name free agent, I think Richards is the best bet, followed by Ribiero, Lecavalier, and then Briere.

I don't disagree with anything Miklasz wrote, but I hope he waddles his ass down to Scottrade this fall with tape recorder in hand because this column means jack shit. I was highly entertained when he called out LaRussa (to his face) a few years ago for "grandstanding." That took some balls. Are the players as pissed off as we are after watching Chicago's glorious celebration? Good question, Bernie. Get down there and find out for us. The head coach could use more back up.

As for these FA centers, I like Lecavalier and his pedigree the best. But chances are he goes back home to Montreal, not to "Baseball Heaven."

The Blues have expressed interest in free-agent Vincent Lecavalier, and at the very least the veteran center is showing that he's willing to listen to the team's pitch.

The Post-Dispatch has confirmed a TSN report that the Blues were one of several clubs to meet with Lecavalier Saturday in New York. The others, according to a report on ESPN.com, were Philadelphia, Toronto, Dallas, Montreal, Washington and Boston.

Since his surprise compliance buyout in Tampa Bay was announced last week, Lecavalier has been the headline name of the upcoming free-agency period, which begins July 5.

Lecavalier, 33, can't sign with a club until then, but he is allowed to meet with teams. Detroit and perhaps a few others were on the schedule for Sunday.

The Blues are in the market for a center but early indications were that the club would target a third- or fourth liner, and they probably still will. But Lecavalier's sudden availability may have altered the team's thinking because he is type of player that the lineup is missing.

Lecavalier, who was the No. 1 overall pick by Tampa Bay in 1998, has 383 goals and 874 points in 1,037 games. His 491 assists are more than the combined total of the four current Blues' centers (342).

The 6-foot-4, 208-pound Lecavalier, who has a left-handed shot, combined for 92 goals and 200 points in 2006-07 and '07-08. He is certainly not that type of player anymore — a step slower by most accounts — but he has netted at least 20 goals and 49 points in each full season since '07-08. In the lockout-shortened '12-13 season, he posted 10 goals and 32 points in 39 games.

Lecavalier's buyout in Tampa Bay was less about a drop in performance and far more about the Lightning's ability to free up finances.

The center had a salary-cap hit of $7.7 million for the next seven years on his original 11-year, $85 million contract. By using one of the team's compliance buyouts, Tampa Bay can pay Lecavalier just two-thirds of the remaining money they owe him ($32 million) over the next 14 years, and under the rules of the new collective bargaining agreement, it will not count against the salary cap.

Many teams, like the Blues, believe that Lecavalier can help.

New Dallas general manager Jim Nill, a longtime assistant to Ken Holland in Detroit, told the Dallas Morning News Saturday that his club made a strong pitch for Lecavalier.

"We made it clear to him that we're interested in him, that we think he would be a good fit on our team, and that we believe he can help us get to where we want to go,'' Nill told the Morning News. "I think what's most important is we shared our vision of where we think this team can be.''

Blues general manager Doug Armstrong did not return a text message from the Post-Dispatch regarding Saturday's face-to-face meeting.

Lecavalier's camp is expected to continue doing its homework over the next week before making a decision on where the veteran center will continue his career.

"We have been reached out to by a number of teams, easily a dozen or more," Kent Hughes, Lecavalier's agent, told ESPN.com a few days ago. "This is the beginning of the process in trying to understand the various situations and trying to narrow it down."

Our problem is a lack of offense. Even Hitch has to realize that. Find a way to squeeze Perron, Lecavalier and Tarasenko onto a line together. All other lines play the Hitch system but give those three free reign to run and gun and do their thing. It couldn't hurt, could it?

Our problem is a lack of offense. Even Hitch has to realize that. Find a way to squeeze Perron, Lecavalier and Tarasenko onto a line together. All other lines play the Hitch system but give those three free reign to run and gun and do their thing. It couldn't hurt, could it?

Forwards set up and score goals.

Defense stops goals from being scored.

2D + 1 Goalie = 3 players on the ice defend.

3 Forwards on the ice set up and score goals.

Even money, right?

Sometimes you get players that can play two-way, players like Big Mac but those that can do it effectively are true elites. Everyone else sets themselves up for one of two effects: Stop goals from being scored or stop themselves from scoring goals.

Of course Hitch won the Jack Adams, he had SIX players playing D and that's what kept the games 1-0, 2-1, etc. That's not rocket science and to me, that's not the mark of a good coach.

We have proven scorers in Perron, Bergy, Stewart, Backes but how do they score in a system like that? There's a reason why some play on the D line and some play on the forward lines; two different skillsets.

This is why we are having scoring deficincies and why players like Pie are having issues. Suddenly everyone is required to score goals and D because hey, we need goals on the board and the people whose job that is, suddenly falls onto you because they're doing your job too.

This isn't good coaching to me and it won't win us jack, except for Hitch's Jack Adams. I mean, it's a nice trophy but the one we want is considerably bigger.

Hitch and Torts are very similar except Torts system is Hitch's on steroids. That kind of system takes a toll on players physically and mentally--I saw it with the Rags and I saw it with the Blues. The guys who want to score are being stifled, we see them as being lazy but we've come to expect everyone to play both roles. Perron, if he was allowed to do his thing, I'm pretty sure would cease to be a scapegoat. It's plain as day the boy doesn't want to play defense, and he has the skills to score in bunches. So why hold him back? As long as he's playing for Hitch or a coach like Hitch, he'll be pretty well useless. Stewart is a freaking enigma wrapped in a riddle. He should thrive in this system but he's so damn lazy. Berglund is knocking on the doorstep--again--but needs a system that lets him showcase his offensive skill set a little more. Tarasenko will likewise be stunted in his development by this system. It's great for getting to the playoffs but if you make it there and can barely muster a goal or two if you're lucky against another playoff caliber team, you'll lose every time. I know defense wins championships but a severe lack of offense loses them every time.

Edit: Just for shits and giggled I decided to look up the stats from the 1995 playoffs when the Devils effectively introduced the world to the neutral zone trap. People branded it as boring hockey, and it was a decidedly strong defensive system. So naturally the Devils would go ahead and not score all that many goals, right? 67 goals in 20 games, just over 3 goals per game, average. We scored 10 goals against LA over 6 games. Last season it was 6 goals over 4 games v. LA. The Devils proved you can play a solid defensive game and still score a lot of goals. So what's Hitch waiting for?

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum